Composição químico-bromatológica e preço de comercialização de fenos destinados a coelhos de companhia

• Autor(a) principal: Ferreira, Vitor Gainon
• Data de Publicação: 2023
• Tipo de documento: Trabalho de conclusão de curso
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional da UFU
• Texto Completo: https://repositorio.ufu.br/handle/123456789/38247
• topic: Alfafa; Coastcross; Oryctolagus cuniculus; Tifton; CNPQ::CIENCIAS AGRARIAS

Rabbits are herbivorous animals, and therefore need to include roughage foods in their diets for the correct functioning of the digestive tract and the use of nutrients necessary for the maintenance of normal body functions. Hays are commonly used in the feeding of companion rabbits as the main source of fiber for these animals. They must be of good quality and supplied as a complement to a balanced diet. The objective of this work was to evaluate the chemical-bromatological composition of hay intended for pet rabbits and compare the results obtained with those on the packaging labels and those found in the Brazilian Tables of Food Composition for Ruminants (CQBAL 4.0) (VALADARES FILHO, S.C.; LOPES, S.A. et al., 2018), as well as comparing the price of a kilo of hay sold packed with the price of a kilo of a bale of hay. For this, hays of alfalfa, coastcross and tifton were acquired from commercial establishments in Uberlândia-MG, and for alfalfa two packages were acquired, called alfalfa 2, and alfalfa 1. The laboratory analyzes carried out were dry matter (DM), matter mineral (MM), crude protein (CP), organic matter (OM), acid detergent fiber (ADF) and neutral detergent fiber (NDF). Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Alfalfa hay 2 had lower values for MM and lower values for DM and OM, possibly due to the contamination of soil particles. Greater differences were observed for crude protein contents, which were lower, for alfalfa 1, coastcross and tifton hays. However, alfalfa 2 showed a higher value. The NDF content of alfalfa 1 and tifton were lower, while alfalfa 2 and coastcross were higher, possibly because they have pieces of thick branches in alfalfa 2 and because of the more yellowish appearance of coastcross. All ADF values analyzed were lower than those observed in the literature. As for the comparison of the price of the kilo of hay sold packed with the price of the kilo of the bale of hay, it was verified that the packages had a much higher value than the bales, with a superior price of 14.38; 18.72 and 11.43 times for alfalfa, coastcross and tifton hay bales, respectively. It was concluded that the hay intended for feeding pet rabbits, sold in packages, had greater differences in terms of protein and fiber contents compared to those reported in the literature. The chemical-bromatological composition of the evaluated hays did not match the manufacturer's guarantee levels. The price of hay packaged in small packages was higher than the price paid for bales.